2021 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 305
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
*Abhay S. Oka, C. J., S. Vishwajith Shetty, J.
Anivar A. Aravind v. Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and Others
W. P. No. 7483 of 2020
1. On 19th August, 2020 rule nisi has been issued in this petition. Thereafter, submissions were heard from time to time on the prayer for interim relief. The submissions were lastly heard on 17th December, 2020 and order was reserved.
2. The issue in this writ petition concerns Aarogya Setu application (for short, 'the Aarogya Setu app') introduced by the Government of India after the nationwide lockdown was announced by the Hon'ble Prime Minister on 24th March, 2020. The National Informatics Centre ('NIC' for short) - seventh respondent launched the Aarogya Setu app on 2nd April, 2020 which is stated to have been downloaded by more than one hundred million users. One of the issues involved is whether the Government of India has a right to use the personal data of Aarogya Setu app users on the app and whether it can transfer / share the data without obtaining the informed consent of the users. On 1st May, 2020, an order was made by the Union Home Secretary, the Ministry of Home Affairs, in his capacity as the Chairperson of the National Executive Committee of the National Disaster Management Authority (for short, 'the NDMA') under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (for short, 'the said Act of 2005'). The said order was passed in exercise of powers under S.10 (2) (l) of the said Act, 2005, by which, new guidelines were issued on lockdown which were annexed to the said order. The guidelines appended to the said order provided for ensuring 100% coverage of the Aarogya Setu app amongst the residents of Containment Zones. On 11th May, 2020, an order was issued by the Chairperson, Empowered Group on Technology and Data Management which was constituted by the National Executive Committee of the NDMA. By the said order of 11 May, 2020, directions were issued in the name and style of' the Aarogya Setu Data Access and Knowledge Sharing Protocol, 2020' (for short, 'the said protocol').
3. Before adverting to the submissions made across the Bar, it is necessary to quote the prayers made in this writ petition both for final relief and interim relief which read thus:
'PRAYER
Wherefore, the petitioner in the above case most respectfully pray this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue:
I. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondent authorities to make the use of Aarogya Setu application by citizens voluntary;
II. A declaration to the effect that the Aarogya Setu app cannot be mandated for accessing any Government service or facility;
III. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 6 and 7 to release the complete and corresponding source code of the current and future versions of the mobile application Aarogya Setu as well as the corresponding application on its server;
III - A. Direction to the respondents to delete and destroy the already collected data including the data collected at the time of registration once the pandemic phase is declared as over by the World Health Organisation or the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
III - B. Direct the respondents not to transfer or share personal data and sensitive personal data of citizens collected through the Aarogya Setu application to third parties except when it is necessary for the treatment purpose of a patient, and even such shared data should be deleted once the pandemic phase is over.
III - C. To set aside Clause 3(vii) of Annexure N issued by the 8 respondent.
III - D. To direct the respondent No.9 not to make it mandatory for commuters to use Aarogya Setu to travel in Bangalore Metro.
IV. Grant any other relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
V. For an order permanently injuncting the respondents from proceeding with the Aarogya Setu app and with the data collected, in any manner, whether the collection of data from members of the public is stated to be voluntary or involuntary.
VI. For an order directing the respondents to permanently delete all the